jnmarstall <jnmarstall@...>
In my opinion, this is precisely why the reflexor is mandatory for the Trigear. Since we can't directly effect the lifting power of the canard (after full elevator deflection), the next best thing is to reduce the lift of the wing which is overpowering the canard during takeoff rotation. Jerry Marstall TriQ2 210 hrs
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
 Original Message  From: "Jay Scheevel" <scheevel@...> To: <QLIST@...> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 11:03 AM Subject: Re: [QLIST] Re: TriQ Nose wheel weight The real issue is how much weight can elevator lift at full deflection for various airspeeds. Since the triQ needs to rotate in order to take off, then the elevator has to be capable of lifting the nose wheel at the desired takeoff airspeed.
Although, at a 0degree pitch angle, and ~150 MPH, the airfoil lift will match the plane weight the plane will fly, 150 MPH this is not a very practical takeoff speed. Slower than that, the elevator needs to be able to lift the remaining weight off the nose that is not being carried by airfoil lift of the flat canard.
The slower the desired takeoff speed, the less weight is borne by the airfoil lift and the more weight must be lifted by elevator deflection. Since the elevator is a fixed size, and its effectiveness decreases with decreasing airspeed, the only option you have to lower the takeoff speed is to lighten the nose wheel load by design.
This is the reason why Scott Swing canted the Main gear as far forward as he did: so the mains would carry ~80% of the load and the nose ~20%. I suspect that 20% or less of the GW is a good target for the nose. A call to Scott Swing would also be helpful to your efforts.
You can use the equation that I put in an earlier post (discussing EW CG) to determine what the appropriate EW main and nose loads should be.
Jay
Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/20/03, 8:14:50 AM, "Ryan" <rryan@...> wrote regarding [QLIST] Re: TriQ Nose wheel weight:
Thanks Jay, This will help me with my Quickie. The information I am looking for is actual nose & maingear weights from flying Qs, both EW & loaded Weight. I would like to see how far from the ideal Canard loading that takeoff and landing can be performed. This information is to learn from others how to avoid "Wheelbarrowing the nosewheel" on a new installation. Ryan
 In QLIST@..., Jay Scheevel <scheevel@a...> wrote:
The amount of weight on the nose wheel of a loaded airplane can be computed algebraically as follows:
 Ma is the Average moment of the grossweight aircraft  GW is the gross weight of the aircraft (this is known: plane, pilot,
fuel and baggage).  CG is the FS of the loaded aircraft. (This is known,at least is known
to be in the envelope!)  MG is the FS of the main gear axles (this is known)  NG is the FS of the nose gear axle (this is known)  NW is the weight on the Nose gear (this is UNKOWN)  MW is the weight on the main gear (this is UNKOWN)
You can construct two equations with two unkowns:
Ma = GW X CG and Ma = (NW X NG) + (MW X MG)
We also we know that GW = NW + MW
By substitution and rearrangement of terms these equations can be reduced
to yield the following ratio:
 NW/MW = (CGMG)/(NGCG)
Notice that the weight terms in the equation disappear in favor of a
fractional weight ratio. However, depending on how you load the plane,
your weights will affect the CG value, which will affect this ratio.
For my case with a triQ200. The MG=56.5" the NG = 2.0" . For a typical loading case the CG =46.0"
For this example, the fraction of nose weight to main weight is 0.238 or
19.3% of the total GW load. If we say the GW was 1100 lbs, the weight on
the nose wheel would be 211.9 pounds (with the other 888.1 on the mains).
You may have different NG, MG and CG's but the equation will still work
the same. Just use your measured values for NG, MG and your anticipated
CG.
As a check of the methodology, one can do the same exercise for the flying surfaces. Here I replace the terms: NG and MG with the CL of the
canard (call this CNG) and the CL of the Main Wing (call this MWG). I
call the canard flyingload (in pounds) CNW and Main wing flying load in
pounds MWW.
The equation becomes:
 CNW/MWW = (CGMWG)/(CNGCG)
With the Q200 the CNG is approximately 24.0 and the MWG is approximately
85.0
Plugging these into the equation for a flying CG of 46.0 we get CNW/MWW =
1.773. Again, using the 1100 lb gross weight, the ratio says that 703.3
lbs is flying on the canard and 396.7 lbs is flying on the main wing. In
other words, 64% of the total gross weight is being carried by the canard. These numbers compare favorably with the QACadvertised 65/35
ratio of load sharing between the canard and mainwing respectively. So I
think my methodology is sound.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Jay
Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/19/03, 7:28:41 PM, "Ryan" <rryan@s...> wrote regarding [Q LIST]
TriQ Nose wheel weight:
Looks like 25% to 40% is OK for empty weights on the nose of a TriQ.
Does any one have known weights with pilot and full fuel weight? Ryan
 In QLIST@..., "Ryan" <rryan@s...> wrote:
What percent of the airplane weight should be on the nose wheel,for
a TriQ ?
Ryan
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: QLISTunsubscribe@... Quickie Builders Association WEB site http://www.quickiebuilders.org
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: QLISTunsubscribe@...
Quickie Builders Association WEB site http://www.quickiebuilders.org
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
